Case Summaries
Bankruptcy Law
[09/03]
Official Comm. of Unsecured Creditors v. Anderson Senior Living Prop., LLC.
In an appeal from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel's (BAP) grant of debtors' motion to dismiss as moot pursuant to 11 U.S.C. section 363(m), plaintiffs' appeal of the bankruptcy court's authorization of the sale of debtors' interests in seven co-owned properties as well as the undivided interests of the tenants in common (TIC), is affirmed as the BAP properly determined that section 363(m) moots the appeal because, even though the bankruptcy court approved the sale of the TIC property interests pursuant to section 363(h), the debtors ultimately sold the properties pursuant to section 363(b) and that sale was never stayed.
[09/02]
US v. Ritchie Special Cred. Invs., Ltd.
In intervenor's application to intervene in an adversary proceeding initiated by the government pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1345 against the alleged author of a Ponzi scheme, the denial of the application is affirmed where: 1) the
litigation progressed substantially between the initiation of these proceedings and intervenor's second motion to intervene; and 2) intervenor had knowledge of all the facts surrounding the district court's injunction, and failed to take issue with it when first presented with an opportunity to do so.
[09/02]
Ritchie Special Cred. Invs., Ltd. v. US Trustee
In a creditor's objection to the appointment of a bankruptcy trustee, arguing that the trustee did not qualify as a “disinterested person” as required by 11
U.S.C. section 1104(d), the denial of the objection is affirmed where: 1) the
bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that the trustee's role and interests as a receiver did not predispose him towards forfeiture or amount to a disqualifying material adverse interest; and 2) there was no abuse of discretion in the bankruptcy court’s determination that creditor failed to show that it would be prejudiced by the trustee's appointment as trustee in the jointly administered estates.
[08/27]
Paloian v. Lasalle Bank, N.A.
In a debtor-hospital's trustee's action to recover, as fraudulent conveyances, some loan payments made during the last years before hospital entered bankruptcy, judgment of the district court is vacated and remanded where: 1) LaSalle Bank is an "initial transferee" as an entity that receives funds for use in paying down a loan, or passing money to investors in a pool, is an "initial transferee" even though the recipient is obliged by contract to apply the funds according to a formula; 2) because the hospital was solvent in August 1997, the ensuing months' debt service cannot be recaptured as a fraudulent conveyance; and 3) on remand, the bankruptcy court is instructed to determine whether the transfer of the accounts receivable to MMA Funding was a true sale, such that MMA Funding served as the bankruptcy-proofing intermediary that the lenders desired.
[08/26]
In re: Zarnel
In an appeal from a district court's order dismissing a bankruptcy trustee's appeal for lack of standing and in the alternative affirming the bankruptcy court's decision to strike the bankruptcy petitions filed by respondents rather than to dismiss their cases, the order is vacated where: 1) the U.S. Trustee's responsibility to represent and protect the public interest afforded it a substantial interest in, and therefore standing, to proceed with this appeal; 2) the court needed only assure itself that it was deciding a live case or controversy, and Article III jurisdiction existed; and 3) the restrictions of 11 U.S.C. sections 301 and 109(h) were not jurisdictional, but rather elements that must be established to sustain a voluntary bankruptcy proceeding.
[08/23]
In re: Raynor
In a Chapter 7 trustee's action to avoid certain transfers that debtor made to his wife, the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel's (BAP) order affirming a stipulated judgment entered by the bankruptcy court, holding that the BAP must defer to the district court's original determination that the cause of action was not time-barred and, pursuant to the law of the case doctrine, declining to revisit the issue, is affirmed where the plain language of 11 U.S.C. section 546 set the statute of limitations period as a full two years, which did not render the claim untimely.
[08/18]
US v. Holstein
Conviction of defendant for bankruptcy fraud and making false statements in bankruptcy petitions, based on providing bankruptcy services at his law firm while on suspension for professional conduct, is affirmed as the evidence was sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt the essential elements of both 18 U.S.C. section 157(1) and 18 U.S.C. section 1519.
[08/16]
US v. Hall
In debtors' appeal from the district court's reversal of the bankruptcy court's order sustaining the IRS's objection to debtors' proposed reorganization plan, the order is reversed where, since the chapter 12 estate is not a taxable entity, the chapter 12 estate cannot "incur" a tax.
[08/12]
In re: Silverman
In debtors' appeal from a bankruptcy court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the trustee, holding that the trustee could recover criminal restitution payments, the order is affirmed where: 1) district court decisions did not bind bankruptcy courts in other districts; and 2) criminal restitution payments were recoverable by a trustee in bankruptcy as preferences under 11 U.S.C. section 547(b).
[08/11]
White v. Wyndham Vacation Ownership, Inc.
In plaintiff's sexual harassment suit against her former employers seeking $250,000 in compensatory damages and $1 million in punitive damages, district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants based on a claim of judicial estoppel is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff asserted a position before the bankruptcy court that was contrary to the position that she asserted before the district court as she did not disclose her sexual harassment claim against defendants in her initial bankruptcy filings; 2) plaintiff had a motive to conceal and knowledge of the factual basis of her harassment claim; and 3) the evidence plaintiff presented of her attempts to advise the bankruptcy court and the trustee of her harassment claim does not excuse her initial omission.
[08/11]
Ziino v. Baker
In an action seeking to levy against assets held in trust for a bankrupt party in an action based on a prior bankruptcy court order, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) the bankruptcy court's order contained no clear designation of plaintiff's entitlement, especially in view of his significant recovery from the bankruptcy estate after the order issued; and 2) plaintiff's privately negotiated agreement with defendant did not qualify as an enforceable judgment for child support.
[08/11]
In re: Celotex Corp.
In adversary proceedings in bankruptcy court concerning creditors' property damage claims against debtor, dismissal of the action is affirmed where the express provisions of the bankruptcy plan documents and the fundamental purpose of the trust did not establish that creditors were entitled to judgment-rate interest.
[08/10]
In re: JTS Corp.
In a bankruptcy adversary proceeding alleging that a member of debtor corporation's board of directors engaged in a constructive fraudulent conveyance by buying property from the company and that defendant was liable for the value of the property, the bankruptcy court's order is affirmed where 1) the bankruptcy court's finding that the reasonably equivalent value of the property was $11,820,000 was not clearly erroneous; 2) this amount was reduced by $10,432,815 million because defendant was a good faith transferee under California Civil Procedure Code section 3439.08; and 3) defendant was entitled to a settlement credit of $4.5 million under California Civil Code section 877.
[08/09]
Community Bank, N.A. v. Riffle
In a creditor's appeal from the bankruptcy court's denial of the creditor's motion to, inter alia, confirm the automatic dismissal of debtors' case, the order is affirmed where, because debtors provided information reflecting "payment received" from debtor's employer in the 60 days prior to the petition, they satisfied the requirements of 11 U.S.C. section 521(a)(1)(B)(iv).
[08/09]
In re: Northlake Dev. L.L.C.
In a creditor's appeal from the district court’s affirmance of the bankruptcy court's decision that certain deeds the creditor held were legal nullities, the Fifth Circuit certifies the following questions to the Supreme Court of Mississippi: When a minority member of a Mississippi limited liability company prepares and executes, on behalf of the LLC, a deed to substantially all of the LLC's real estate, in favor of another LLC of which the same individual is the sole owner, without authority to do so under the first LLC's operating agreement, is the transfer of real property pursuant to the deed: (i) voidable, such that it is subject to the intervening rights of a subsequent bonafide purchaser for value and without notice, or (ii) void ab initio, i.e., a legal nullity?
